Its about 6 MPH, which is about double normal walk speed, and about the average speed of jogging. So I imagine that the transition isnt too bad, as its far from a dead sprint. You could probably slow yourself in a 2 - 5 paces for the average person. Obviously YMMV, but I dont think stopping transition is going to be a huge issue for most people.

At around $3 dollars a meal, the pricing isnt so terrible. Find me another nutrient complete meal that has that low cost, and low prep time. Sure there is room for improvement in taste and cost, but I don't think this is overly expensive. I spend way more than $70 a week on food and its not nearly as healthy.

Whats the pricing issue? It comes down to about $3 dollars a meal. Thats very cheap for getting a nutrient complete meal for every serving. I spend far more than $3 a meal and I eat way less healthy food per sitting. I also didn't find its taste to be vomit worthy. its not as good as pizza, but its not the worst tasting thing in the world. It tastes like uncooked oatmeal.

Prove it? please provide me with a single example of infinite resources that a single person owns but still attempts to take it from others. You can't. Even the richest people in the world have limitations to what they can actually afford. Yeah, some guys can only afford that 100ft yacht, which is what makes that 200ft yacht cooler for the guy who can. If we could all have 200ft yachts then most people would probably go with something closer to what they needed. You are using established greed and projecting it onto a level of production we have never experienced and assuming it will be the same. Every point you make is based entirely around limited resources, yet you're modded insightful? Resources being scarce is why executives want to make more money, and make you pay more for the goods. You keep spending large sums, giving them more money and you less.

Take a few steps back from the situation and follow all the greed of today, and you'll follow it back to limited resources. Land, food, water, etc. Now, picture a world where land, and every possession you could ever imagine is free. No wait period, no money, nothing. How does that not have a profound effect? Some people will still be gluttonous regarding specific things, but their greed no longer impacts anyone but themselves. I think those that are truly greedy will always seek power, and they will attempt to claw their way to the top of whatever political structure we have in place. Influence will become the new limited resource.

It's less about 'keeping them in their place' and more about them appreciating that you are giving up something you worked hard for. If I work everyday to earn twenty dollars, and every day you ask for a dollar, eventually I'm going to get tired of supporting you when I have my own financial issues to worry about. Now, if I saw that you were working hard to make your own buck, and didn't need mine all the time, the moments when you did need some help would make me more inclined to help out. When you continue to receive hand outs, you no longer appreciate what is being done for you. I'll assume beggars is you're term for homeless, because if people are JUST begging for no reason, then screw them. Homeless people need help, but my dollar is not the way to long term support. You cannot rely on others for your well being, whether you are a country or a person. It's great to have friends, but one day they wont be there, and it's entirely your fault if you're not prepared for that day.

If you read the article, they specifically say that based on their findings the reader should make their decisions themselves and not trust the author. Go find her CV and call around to see how honest it is for yourself if you really want to know. The real question here should be (and it is posed in the DM article), who do you trust more at face value? A Noble laureate like Sir Tim Hunt, or this never before heard of St Louis? Does the support of his colleges, including females in the industry sway your opinion at all? Does the fact that St Louis is a writer who could very well be trying to make a name for herself add to any skepticism? These are all things that no one took into account before jumping all over Hunt. It seems like all the parties involved here besides the person negatively impacted have questionable reputations, and I think thats the point.

No, you're reading it wrong. He said stop using Steam. Then he said he's not a steam user, but he's walked away from Microsoft products because he doesn't like them, therefore he's confident you can do the same. I get it, the internet is hard, but don't blame him because you didn't take a moment to reread his message and attempt to understand what he was saying. Try reading his message with this additional insight, and it reads perfectly fine.

Manning was part of that lobby. What you're either unaware of, or choosing to ignore, is that kickers forced a change well before that. Kickers used to fuck with the ball a lot, forcing the NFL to change the rules. Brady and Manning simply wanted more freedom like was previously available, and the league created specific guidelines to avoid the issues of the past and compromise with the players. So weigh Mannings balls, he just broke every record last season.

They are past the low out door temp for the most part. Now the issue is believed to be ball preparation. The Patriots are saying (specifically BB) is that the rub down and pregame ball warm up artificially increases the psi of the ball. It's then weighed by an official, the official sees it's high and lowers it(NFL regulations says the ball must be between 12.5 and 13.5 psi). The ball then sits around until the game, and that's when it falls under the the 12.5 requirement, THEN you add in the weather. But the out door weather doesn't matter, as the balls are tested in the same environment (temp) both times. So no the physicists are not there to test the well established PV/T.

Couldn't you simply place a reader on both sides of the door? This way it gets tagged twice with timestamps, and you simply review which door was activated when. This ensures reliable movement tracking.

There is far more at work there than words though. If I shout "kill the Jews" where I am, no one is going to go kill Jews. The people that do go attack them are not acting on my words, they are acting on their own hatred. When you make an act of violence towards someone else, you are responsible for that. I don't care if someone tells me to go punch some dude in the face, if I go punch the guy that is on me.

No, I think it works just fine. If I own a gun, and suddenly they become outlawed, I too become an outlaw. I don't suddenly become part of a crime ring of some sort. If you outlaw red clothing, and I own a red shirt, I become an outlaw. If you ban anonymity people will still use things like TOR. That doesn't mean they are using it for passing around CP or bullying people, people don't suddenly start to partake in other illegal activities because of the ban. The point is, if you ban something that is commonly used or owned, people will suddenly become outlaws for no other reason than because it illegal to have.